V. I. Lenin

December 9, 1918

Brief Newspaper Report

Delivered: 8 December, 1918First Published: Published in full in 1919 in the pamphlet Speeches by Lenin, Milgutin and Nogin at the Third Workers’ Co-operative Congress; Published according to the pamphlet checked with the verbatim report; Brief report published in Izvestia No. 270, December 10, 1918 Source: Lenin’s Collected Works, 4th English Edition, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1972 Volume 28, pages 329-337Translated: Jim RiordanTranscription/HTML Markup: David Walters & Robert
CymbalaOnline Version:Lenin Internet
Archive May, 2002

(Stormy ovation.) Comrades, the workers’ co-operatives are
today faced with extremely important economic and political
tasks. Both the one and the other are now part and parcel of the
economic and political struggle. In respect of the immediate
tasks I want to underline the meaning of “conciliation
with the co-operatives”. This conciliation, mentioned so
frequently of late in the papers, radically differs from the
conciliation with the bourgeoisie, which is nothing short of
treachery. This conciliation we are talking about now is
conciliation of a very special kind. There is a world of
difference between the Soviet Government’s conciliation
with Germany which produced some results, and the
conciliation-which would be harmful and even fatal to the
country of the working class with the bourgeoisie. What that
pretext of conciliation amounts to is the complete betrayal both
of the class struggle and the fundamentals of
socialism. Socialists who are well aware that their chief task
is to fight the bourgeoisie and capital appreciate this
distinction.

All of us very well realise that there can only be one
alternative in our class struggle: recognition either of the rule
of capital or of the working class. We know that all the attempts
by the petty-bourgeois parties to form and pursue their policy in
the country are doomed to failure before they even start.. We have
clearly seen and experienced several attempts by various
petty-bourgeois parties and groups to push through their policy,
and we see that all attempts by intermediate forces are bound to
end in failure. By virtue of the very definite conditions there
are only two central forces, standing at opposite ends of the
pole, that can have a hold on Russia, can decide her fate one way
or the other. I will go even further and say that the whole world
is being formed and directed by one or the other of these central
forces. As far as Russia is concerned I can say quite definitely
that, because of the specific economic conditions, only one of
these forces can take control. The rest, the intermediate forces,
may be numerous but they can never count for much.

Right now, the Soviet authorities must face the question of
conciliation with the co-operatives. In April we departed from our
vowed intention and made concessions. Naturally enough, there
should be no class co-operatives in a country where all classes
are being eliminated, but, I repeat, the conditions of the time
demanded a certain delay and we put it off for a few months.
Nevertheless, we all realise that the Soviet government will
never abandon the position it now occupies. We had to make those
concessions since at that time we were alone in the whole
world. Our concessions were due to the difficulties we had in our
work. Because of the economic tasks which the proletariat had
taken on, we had to reconcile ourselves to and preserve certain
petty-bourgeois habits. The point here is that in one way or
another we must ensure the guidance and co-ordination of the
activity of the whole mass of working and exploited people. We
must all the while bear in mind what the proletariat requires of
us. A popular government must remember that the various sections
of the petty bourgeoisie will more and more come over to the
governing working class when they eventually see there is no
choice, that all their hopes of a middle way of running the
country are finally ruined. All the wonderful slogans about
popular will, the Constituent Assembly and the like, which were a
screen for all the half-measures, were immediately swept away the
moment genuine popular will asserted itself. You can see for
yourselves what happened and how all these slogans, the
half-measure slogans, were scattered to the winds. At the given
moment, we can see this happening throughout the whole world in
revolution as well as in Russia.

I want to show you the difference between the conciliation
which produced such an appalling disgust throughout the working
class, and the conciliation which we are now calling for,
agreement with all the small peasants, all the petty
bourgeoisie. At the time of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty, when
we accepted the harsh terms of the treaty, it was said there was
no hope of a world revolution, nor could there be. We were quite
alone in the world. We know that at that time many parties were
repelled from us because of the treaty and joined the
bourgeoisie. At that time we had to endure all sorts of terrible
experiences. A few months later we saw there was and could be no
choice, no middle way.

When the German revolution came, everyone realised that
revolution was sweeping the whole world, that Britain, France and
America were also going the same way-along our path! When our
petty-bourgeois democrats followed their patrons, they did not
realise where they were being led, they did not realise they were
being led along the capitalist road. Now we see by the example of
the German revolution that these representatives and patrons of
democracy, these Wilsons and Co., are imposing worse treaties on a
defeated nation than the Brest-Litovsk Treaty which was forced on
us. It is quite clear to us that international demagogy is now
bankrupt because of the events in the West and the new
situation. Now the physiognomy of every nation is as clear as can
be. Now, the masks have been torn off and all the illusions have
been dispelled by the battering-ram of history.

It is natural that the Soviet government should have to use all
its influence and weight with such waverers who are always around
during a transition, so as to carry out tasks which we are now
setting, tasks which back our policy begun in April. We then had
to put off our vowed intentions for a while; then we consciously
and openly made several concessions.

Someone asked about exactly where we stand on this road. Now
the whole of Europe clearly sees that our revolution is no longer
in the experimental stage; the attitude of the civilised nations
to us has now changed. They now appreciate that in this respect we
are doing something new and tremendous, that we have had so much
trouble because for almost all the time we stood utterly alone and
completely forsaken by the entire international proletariat. In
this respect we have been guilty of many serious mistakes which we
do not in any way hide. We should, of course, have endeavoured to
unite the whole population and not to divide them. We may not have
done it up to now and we must get down to the job sometime. We
have already joined up with many organisations. Now, the
workers’ co-operatives and Soviet bodies should be
merged. Since this April we have been organising on the basis of
experience and we have been employing the store of social and
political forces that we have at our disposal. We have been
organising the supply and distribution of goods among the whole
population. We have checked every step we took because this
organisation has been particularly difficult to carry out in our
economically backward country. Agreements with the co-operatives
were first made in April and the decree issued on the complete
merger and organisation of supply and distribution pursues the
same aim.

The previous speaker mentioned friction in a reference to
Petrograd; we know there is friction almost everywhere. We also
know that this friction is quite inevitable because the time has
come when two utterly different types of apparatus are meeting and
merging. We know too, however, that we have to pass through it
because it is inevitable. In just the same way you must realise
that the long resistance put up by the workers’
co-operatives has finally resulted in distrust from the Soviet
government, a distrust that is perfectly natural.

You say you want independence. It is quite natural that anyone
who puts forward this demand should induce distrust. If you
complain of friction and want to avoid it, then you must first
give up the idea of independence since anyone who insists on that
is an enemy of the Soviet government at a time when we are all
striving for a closer union. Once the workers’ co-operatives
unite in a perfectly clearcut, honest and open way with the Soviet
government, this friction will begin to disappear. I know only too
well that when two groups merge the work does not proceed smoothly
at first. Nevertheless, with a little time, when the one group
earns the trust of the other, all the friction gradually fades
away. However, constant inter-departmental friction is likely if
the two groups stay apart. I don’t understand what
independence has got to do with it. After all we all agree that
the whole of society should be one big co-operative as far as
supply and distribution are concerned. All of us agree that the
co-operatives are a socialist gain. There lies the immense
difficulty of socialist gains. There lie the difficulty and aim of
victory. Capitalism deliberately splits the population. This split
must disappear once and for all, and the whole of society must
become a single workers’ co-operative. There can and must be
no question of any kind of independence for individual groups.

To establish this type of co-operative I was speaking about
just now is the condition for the victory of socialism. That is
why we say that no matter what difference of opinion we may have
over private matters, we shall never come to terms with capitalism
or take any step away from the principles of our struggle. The
agreement we are now going to make with sections of social classes
is an agreement not with the bourgeoisie or capital, but with
individual groups of workers and democrats. There is nothing to be
afraid of in this agreement because the whole difference between
these sections will disappear without. a trace in the fire of
revolution. Now all we need is a single will to enter with an open
heart that single world co-operative. What the Soviet government
and the co-operatives have done up to now must be merged. That is
the substance of the latest decree passed by the Soviet
government. That has been the approach by Soviet representatives
in many places in the absence of our decree. The tremendous good
accomplished by the co-operatives must be merged with the
tremendous good accomplished by the Soviet government. All
sections of the population fighting for their freedom must be
merged in a single strong organisation. We know we have made a lot
of mistakes, especially in the first months after the October
Revolution. But from now onwards, after a passage of time, we
shall endeavour to attain a complete union and complete agreement
among the population. To do so, everything must come under the
Soviet government and all illusions about some sort of
“independence", whether for individual groups or the
workers’ co-operatives, must be dispelled as quickly as
possible. Hopes for “independence” can only be held
out where there can still be hopes for some sort of return to the
past.

The Western nations once regarded us and all our revolutionary
movement as a curiosity. They used to say: “Let the people
have their fling; we shall wait and see how it all works out
.... Queer people, those Russians!” Now the “queer
Russians” have shown the world what their
“fling” means. (Applause.)

Now that the German revolution has broken out, a foreign consul
said to Zinoviev: “It’s hard to say at this point who
has made better use of the Brest-Litovsk Peace, you or
we.”

He said this because everyone was saying it. Everyone saw that
this was just the beginning of the great world revolution. And
this great revolution was started by the backward and
“queer” Russian people .... History certainly has
strange ways: that a backward country should have the honour of
leading a great world movement, which is seen and understood by
the bourgeoisie of the whole world. This conflagration has swept
Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Holland.

This movement is spreading from day to day, the revolutionary
Soviet Government is daily gaining in strength. That is why the
bourgeoisie have now taken an entirely different attitude to
matters. Now that the axe is about to fall on world capitalism,
there can be no question at all of any independence for individual
parties. America provides the most glaring example. America is one
of the most democratic countries, it is a great democratic social
republic. Where else, if not in that country-which has all the
electoral rights and all the rights of a free state-could we
expect a correct solution to all legal questions? Yet we know what
has happened to a clergyman there, in that democratic republic: he
was tarred and whipped until his blood flowed in the dust. This
took place in a free country, in a democratic republic. This was
allowed to happen by the “humane",
“philanthropic” Tiger Wilsons and Co. What are these
Wilsons now doing with Germany, a defeated country? The pictures
of world relations are displayed before us in full view! We see
the substance of what the Wilsons offer their friends from these
pictures, which carry such overwhelming conviction. The Wilsons
would have instantly proved our point. These gentlemen-the free
multimillionaires, the “most humane” people in the
world-would have instantly broken their friends’ habit of
talking, even of dreaming, of “independence” in any
form. They would have squarely put before you the alternative:
either you stand for the capitalist system or you stand for the
Soviets. They would have said: do this, because we say so, we,
your friends, the British, the Amnericans-the Wilsons, and the
French Clemenceau’s friends.

That is why it is quite hopeless to expect any vestige of
independence to remain. This cannot be, and it is no use dreaming
of it. There can be no middle course once it is a question of
protecting property on the one hand, and once the proletariat has
found its way on the other. The branches of the tree of life must
either be closely intertwined with capital, or even more closely
with the Soviet Republic. It is absolutely clear to everyone that
socialism has entered the period of its realisation. It is quite
clear to everyone that it is absolutely impossible to maintain or
retain petty-bourgeois positions through universal suffrage. The
Wilsons may nurture such illusions, rather, they do not nurture
such illusions but try to embellish their own aims by fostering
such illusions, but you won’t find many people nowadays who
believe these fairy-tales. If such people do exist, they are a
historical rarity or a museum piece. (Applause.)

The differences you have had from the outset about preserving
the “independence” of the co-operative movement are
nothing but vain efforts which must peter out without any hope of
a positive solution. This struggle is not serious and it clashes
with the principles of democracy. Although this is not surprising
because the Wilsons are also “democrats”. They say
that it remains for them to establish one final union because they
have so many dollars they can buy up the whole of Russia, and the
whole of India, and the whole world. Wilson presides over their
company, their pockets are bulging with dollars and that is why
they talk about buying up Russia and India and everything
else. But they forget that basic international issues are settled
in an entirely different manner, that only some people, in a
definite environment, may be impressed by their statements. They
forget that the resolutions daily adopted by the strongest class
in the world-the kind our own Congress is sure to adopt
unanimously-greet only the dictatorship of the proletariat all
over the world. By adopting such a resolution our Congress takes
the road which does not and cannot lead to the kind of
“independence” being discussed here today. You are
aware that Karl Liebknecht has shown some opposition not only to
the petty-bourgeois peasants, but also to the cooperative
movement. You know that just for this Scheidemann and company
consider him a dreamer and fanatic, yet you addressed a message of
greetings to him, just as you sent greetings to Maclean. By
voicing solidarity on these matters with the great world leaders
you have burnt your boats. You must keep a firm stand because at
the moment you are standing up not only for yourselves, not only
for your own rights, but also for the rights of Liebknecht and
Maclean. I have often heard the Russian Mensheviks condemn
conciliation, and inveigh against those who came to terms with the
Kaiser’s lackeys. Nor were the Mensheviks alone in erring
that way. The whole world pointed at us, hurling this stern
charge: “Conciliators.” Now that the world revolution
has started, and they have to deal with Haase and Kautsky, we have
the right to describe our position in the words of the good
Russian proverb: “Let’s stand back, and see how well
we are placed.”

We know our shortcomings, and they are easily pointed out. But
to the onlooker everything appears to be quite different from
what it actually is. At one time, you know, everyone in the
other parties condemned our behaviour and our policy, and now
whole parties are siding with
us.[2] The wheel of the
world revolutionary movement has now turned to such an extent
that we need not fear any kind of conciliation whatsoever. And I
am sure that our Congress will find the right way out of the
situation. There is only one way out: a merger of the
co-operative movement with the Soviet government. You know that
Britain, France, America and Spain regarded our actions as
experiments; they have now changed their tune: they now have to
look to their own affairs at home. Of course, physically,
materially and financially they are considerably stronger than
we are, but in spite of their outward polish we know they are
rotten inside; they are stronger than we are at present with the
strength that was Germany’s when the Brest-Litovsk Peace
Treaty was concluded. But what do we see now? Everyone recoiled
from us then. Now, every month we spend in strengthening the
Soviet Republic we spend in defending not only ourselves, but
also the cause started by Liebknecht and Maclean, and we already
see that Britain, France, America and Spain have been infected
with the same disease and are fired with the same flame as
Germany, the flame of the universal and world-wide struggle of
the working class against imperialism. (Prolonged applause.)

Endnotes

[1]
The Congress was held in Moscow on December 6-11, 1918. It was
attended by 208 voting delegates and 98 non-voting delegates. 121
of the voting delegates were Communists and their sympathisers and
the other 87 delegates were supporters of
“independent” co-operatives, i.e., Mensheviks and
Bight Socialist-Revolutionaries who advocated the independence of
the co-operatives from the Soviet state. Lenin spoke about the
tasks of workers’ co-operatives at the evening session on
December 9. Among other speakers were V. P. Nogie and
V. P. Milyutin. The Congress censured the anti-Soviet demands for
“independence” for the co-operatives and decided to
get the worker!’ co-operatives to organise food supplies
jointly with state food organs. The Congress elected the
All-Russia Council of Workers’ Co-operatives of 15 members,
10 of whom were Communists (V. P. Nogin, V. P. Milyutin,
I. I. Skvortsov-Stepanov and others.

[2]
This refers to the Narodnik Communists and Revolutionary
Communists who had split away from the Left
Socialist-Revolutionary Party (see Note 128).